On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 05:26:38PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 09:41:51PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: > [...] > > Given that we have had this versioning system for years and no problem > > specifically with 2.4 has been raised, I see this as 2.5+ material at > > this point. > > I see this on 2.4 schedule: > > "2015-06-16 Soft feature freeze. All features > should have patches on the list by this date; major features should have > initial code committed." > > It is a 9-line patch (from which 6 are declarations, and 2 are actual > code statements), it doesn't affect anybody who is not explicitly using > "-cpu custom", it is an useful feature, and it has been on the list > since June 8 (and as RFC since April 13). > > Unless somebody gives me a good reason to consider it harmful (that's > different from not accepting the explanations why it is useful, or > disagreeing with users that want to use it), I would like to include it > in 2.4 as long as I get Reviewed-by lines before hard freeze.
For the record I have nothing against the patch itself. Might be useful for testing or something. And how libvirt uses QEMU is, in the end, in the hands of libvirt developers. I do care about command line stability generally, and about people not breaking existing documentation and tools using QEMU directly as opposed to through libvirt, that's the only reason I participated in this discussion. > -- > Eduardo
